2012 Year End Ratings

A little off topic, but as regards a benchmark rating... how long does that last for you? One USTA year?

Also, say you are a 3.5 and your team advances into the playoffs, you get benchmarked AND you get bumped to 4.0... you are now a 4.0b. I understand that a benchmark rating is sort of an indicator of equality across different regions... but the benchmark given was as a 3.5. You are no longer a 3.5, you are now a 4.0b, but you haven't played league against other 4.0s yet.... so you aren't really a benchmark 4.0, right?

I know it doesn't really matter, but it seems misleading in a minor sort of way.

Click to expand...

It is misleading only if you interpret "4.0B" to mean "a player that achieved a benchmark playing at 4.0". You need to instead interpret it as "a player that advanced to playoffs last year and became benchmark for that reason that happened to have a year-end rating of 4.0".

As has been noted before, being benchmark doesn't indicate anything about your level, it simply means you can be used as a benchmark due to having played in playoffs against teams from other areas/districts/sections.

It is misleading only if you interpret "4.0B" to mean "a player that achieved a benchmark playing at 4.0". You need to instead interpret it as "a player that advanced to playoffs last year and became benchmark for that reason that happened to have a year-end rating of 4.0".

As has been noted before, being benchmark doesn't indicate anything about your level, it simply means you can be used as a benchmark due to having played in playoffs against teams from other areas/districts/sections.

It is misleading only if you interpret "4.0B" to mean "a player that achieved a benchmark playing at 4.0". You need to instead interpret it as "a player that advanced to playoffs last year and became benchmark for that reason that happened to have a year-end rating of 4.0".

As has been noted before, being benchmark doesn't indicate anything about your level, it simply means you can be used as a benchmark due to having played in playoffs against teams from other areas/districts/sections.

Click to expand...

Thank you... and the benchmark rating is for one year (assuming the player does not advance the following year)?

Cindy, feels the same as when I played up the last two years. Only now I won't have to suffer through 7.0 mixed. Won't see as much 8.0 time, but after our run to sectionals last year, we will be kind of starting over anyway. I'll work on singles instead. Plus I'll be in the last semester of nursing school. I'll be fine thanks.

As a 3.5 woman, I played two years of 8.0 with a 4.5 guy. I returned both 4.0 and 4.5 mens serves. Some of you need to get over yourself.

Often, there is no specific weakness holding a player back. Rather, it's that the players at the higher level just do everything better than you're used to, and it takes experience to adjust to that. They get more balls back on what you're used to being winners. They hit winners where you think they are going to be forced into a defensive shots. They give you less free points on errors. They force you into defensive positions. Etc.

You're not going to address that by playing weaker players, even if you are dominating them.

No doubt in my mind that you will improve most by playing at the higher level only, rather than splitting playing time between higher and current level.

The only exception is if you have a fragile ego and need the confidence boost of still getting some wins at the lower level while you get your butt kicked at the higher level.

Click to expand...

yes this is generally correct from personal experience. i was a solid high school #1 singles player at a strong New England team when i was young. had an opportunity as a walk on at a div 3 college with a strong team. couldn't make academics and sports work for me - so didn't play.

took a 10 year hiatus from the sport, came back to the sport with a USTA evaluator rating me a 4.5. hung there based on speed and athleticism, and started a family. took another hiatus (this one 15 years and + 50lbs...) and played ok as a self rated 3.5. eventually dominated after a year or two and got bumped to 4.0 and now am finally getting to a point where i can deal with everything you mention in your post. the guys that beat me this year were all bumped to 4.5.

3.5 Women cannot handle a 4.0 Male GOAT serve if he was playing at 100%. Especially tricky slice serves out wide. The 3.5 woman tends to panic and expose general weakness at the wicked 4.0 slice.

Most 4.5 men drop 25% capacity/power when playing against low end 3.5 women. I don't know any 4.5 GOATs that serve at full speed in Mixed.

When Fedace played Combo for our team he would serve at around 40% GOAT capacity.

Click to expand...

this also correct form personal experience. i will not serve 100% to a 3.5 or lower lady in league match play. unless she is a major ringer. we had one of those at states last year and she handled everything anyone hit to her with patience. a clear indicator to me of an out of level lady.

this also correct form personal experience. i will not serve 100% to a 3.5 or lower lady in league match play. unless she is a major ringer. we had one of those at states last year and she handled everything anyone hit to her with patience. a clear indicator to me of an out of level lady.

Click to expand...

I think your first hint concerning the nature about JoelDali's post are the phrases "4.0 male GOAT" and "Fedace"

this also correct form personal experience. i will not serve 100% to a 3.5 or lower lady in league match play. unless she is a major ringer. we had one of those at states last year and she handled everything anyone hit to her with patience. a clear indicator to me of an out of level lady.

Click to expand...

And those are the ladies (out of level) that you will most likely find playing 8.0 with a 4.5 guy, especially at states and beyond. We had two on our team...and the other one was *leagues* better than me (and I was considered a pretty solid ringer...many believed I should have been moved up the year before).

I've said it before, and will say it again...pure pace can be blocked. You start spinning that serve, and then I've got problems. Getting better at taking them early, but it is still a work in progress.

Many of my friends in my tennis group got bumped. I realized, many of them were recent self rates (as in the past few years) and had always enjoyed success at their level from the get go. For the first time, they are looking at a new level where they will win some matches, but also lose. And lots of them aren't used to losing.

Meanwhile, a few of us have moved up after spending a few years at other levels, and suffering those growing pains. My first year at 3.5 was absolutely terrible.

I wonder if that will 'break' some of them...that aren't used to losing...if they will leave tennis and go find something else.

Its really two different experiences, and in the end run, I think it is better to know what to expect of a new level and to have that realization that you're going to pay your dues, but it is worth it to play against better opponents.

true that. strangest thing I've seen in my few yrs playing usta league were some bump downs. played a fellow this past weekend whose a 4.5 teaching pro closer to 5.0+. now is 4.0 after playing only mixed last year.

Return of serve is my weakest shot. I have played 4.5 guys. I am sure there must be an instance on record where I actually got the 4.5 guy's serve into play, but I have no memory of it.

If you are able to hit decent returns in 8.0 mixed, you are way better than me.

Then again, that's not saying much -- everybody is way better than me in 8.0 mixed!

Click to expand...

I played BH side, which I think helped for ROS. The only ones I never ever got back were high kickers to my BH.

Maybe my experience is an anomaly, but my partner and I played together for two years, and didn't drop a match until the finals of districts this year. I saw plenty of big serves, from some guys who are now 5.0. I think the trick is to not try to do too much. Just get it back in play.

And if the other guy does hold, fine...as long as we held and we broke the opposing female, then we were fine.

My partner and I worked well together...both singles players, haha! He is super tall (ask AQ, she saw us play this year) and my job was to be consistent and keep the ball in play until he could put it away.

I played BH side, which I think helped for ROS. The only ones I never ever got back were high kickers to my BH.

Click to expand...

The closest part of my game to the 4.5 level is the serve. I have noticed that if I am trying to win and place serves carefully with spin the ladies have very little chance ... however if I am determined to show everyone the size of my .... racket .... and hit hard flat serves the women have a very easy time blocking it back into play. This is almost the complete reverse of the men.

And if the other guy does hold, fine...as long as we held and we broke the opposing female, then we were fine.

Click to expand...

This is (or should be) the mantra for successful mixed play, especially at the higher levels.

My partner and I worked well together...both singles players, haha! He is super tall (ask AQ, she saw us play this year) and my job was to be consistent and keep the ball in play until he could put it away.

Click to expand...

Here to confirm. Topaz was Ms. Consistency and said-partner was The Closer, a net monster and monster server. On a side note, of the pair they played the time I watched them, the opposing female was bumped....up....to 4.5 (deservedly, in my opinion...not so much based on that day's play but her record in our area throughout the season).

But seriously, it's hard to beat a 4.5M/3.5W at 8.0 Mixed. Invariably, they're both at the top of their class. It's part of the reason I am against "combo" play for mixed. The potential disparity is even more pronounced in true Combo (6.5, 7.5, 8.5) but I don't like it even in "8.0". I mean, why then, don't we have 8.0 Womens? We don't. It's 4.0W and 4.0M...where everyone on the court is 4.0 (or less). Fewer mismatches, generally better, more even "play" -- and isn't that what NTRP is supposed to be designed for?

I can assure you that if I were bumped down to 3.5, I would play entire matches hitting nothing but kick serves, hitting drop shots, and slicing my head off. I cannot do these things in 4.0 matches because these shots still need work, and my partners would not stand for my developing my game in the middle of competitive matches.

Click to expand...

Getting bumped up has done this for me ... I know that I will not be playing for districts or sectionals anytime soon as there are about 1000 4.5's better than me in my section. Even if my team does happen to make it, I would never see the court.

So this is going to open up time for me to work on my game ... not in league matches but rather I can work on those things in all the free evenings I am going to have for the next season or two until I get better or bumped back down.

This is (or should be) the mantra for successful mixed play, especially at the higher levels.

Here to confirm. Topaz was Ms. Consistency and said-partner was The Closer, a net monster and monster server. On a side note, of the pair they played the time I watched them, the opposing female was bumped....up....to 4.5 (deservedly, in my opinion...not so much based on that day's play but her record in our area throughout the season).

But seriously, it's hard to beat a 4.5M/3.5W at 8.0 Mixed. Invariably, they're both at the top of their class. It's part of the reason I am against "combo" play for mixed. The potential disparity is even more pronounced in true Combo (6.5, 7.5, 8.5) but I don't like it even in "8.0". I mean, why then, don't we have 8.0 Womens? We don't. It's 4.0W and 4.0M...where everyone on the court is 4.0 (or less). Fewer mismatches, generally better, more even "play" -- and isn't that what NTRP is supposed to be designed for?

/another rant...over

Click to expand...

That's a good point AQ...8.0 women's could/should also be 3.5+4.5!! (and men's too, I suppose) Never thought of it that way.

That match was not a good returning match for me, but again...at districts all I saw were kickers wide to my BH. Worst was at sectionals in our second match against DC...I was almost in the court next to us, and STILL not getting the serve back! (a match we won 4 and 4...let the guy hold, but not the girl!!!)

That philosophy does put pressure on my own service games, but I know my best mixed partner is an aggressive net player...so as long I get my first serve and placed reasonably well, things usually are good to go.

Combo mixed is kind of a joke at this point...most of the 7.5 teams are really 8.5! My main partner got bumped to 4.5, and one of my two remaining partners also got bumped. And same story on Downs' team. That's what happens with the last league of the year I suppose. I wonder if having ESR around here would help alleviate that, or not matter at all?

She got bumped to 4.5? I remember she had *solid* groundies, and was much more comfy at the baseline. We picked up on that pretty quickly. We had a nice match...quite contrary to the court next to us, which I thought was going to go to fisticuffs at one point.

I got bumped down- 4.0 to 3.5 which makes no sense but it is what it is. My record had many many close matches. So my question is this..... Whats the quickest way to get bumped back up? Should i play 3.5 at all or play 4.0?

Click to expand...

I'm surprised nobody has suggested this approach:

1. Practice
2. Take lessons
3. Practice

I believe you'll find it to be most effective. Possibly not the quickest, but with more staying power.

I would agree that mixed 8.0 should be 4.0 players only (and 3.5s playing up with 4.0s). 7.0 should be 3.5 players only. And so on. I mean, rec tennis is supposed to be fun. How is it fun for anyone to have some 4.5 guy fire twist serves at me for me to whiff them? With a 4.0 guy, I have a decent shot at the serve.

Interesting idea about the woman receiving on the ad side. I used to receive on the ad side, but I have switched. I found it was important to have the guy's FH overhead in the middle as much as possible.

I've been told you have to have played one complete set, so I don't think 4-3, retired (i.e. 7 games) would count. But then 6-0, retired probably wouldn't count either (just as 6-0, 6-0 does not unless you're an S, A, or T). So maybe it's at least one set and at least 7 games.

In general, yes, assuming you can get a reasonable number of matches at the higher level - obviously, chances of moving up are not good if you only get to play 1 or 2 matches.

But assuming a similar number of matches, it comes down to what DNTRP delta you can achieve/expect per match (the incremental dynamic rating increase/decrease you get following each match).

If you are a top 3.5 playing 3.5, you are *expected* to beat most other 3.5s. USTA says 6-1 or even 6-0 sets are to be expected when a person at top of level plays a person at bottom of level. So basically, as a top 3.5, you don't get much incremental rating increase by beating up on weaker 3.5s, or even convincingly beating mid-level 3.5s - because that's already expected of you. You can get some increases by beating other top level 3.5s, but who's to say how many of those you are going to face. That's why you sometimes see players with great records and convincing wins still not get bumped up - because the wins did not come against opponents with high-enough dynamic ratings.

On the other hand, when you play up, you are expected to get killed. So any scores that are better than a complete beat-down are going to increase your dynamic rating. So for example if you are a 3.5 playing average 4.0s, and you lose all your matches 3 & 3, that is likely to be enough to get you bumped up... because that would give you results similar to what would be expected of a low-level 4.0 vs mid-level 4.0s. And even against higher-level 4.0s, you can generally scrape together a few games (some stronger players will lose focus once it's clear they are going to win).

Purely anecdotal, but in my experience the majority of players who get bumped up played some at the higher-level already in the year prior (usually in addition to their rated level). It's harder (but obviously not impossible) to get bumped up playing only at your rated level.

BTW I am thinking mostly of singles. The same logic applies to dubs, but the waters are muddied because then your partner's rating also comes into play. In terms of bump-up odds, you're better off playing with a weaker partner (assuming you can carry him and still get results). Playing with a stronger partner increases the combined rating of your team which raises the bar of what results you are expected to get before you get any dynamic ratings increases.

You aren't doomed, but yes, playing with a stronger partner raises the bar on your expected result, but that may or may not be a win.

If your opponents are also strong 4.0s you may still be expected to lose, perhaps fairly big, so a close loss could still improve your rating.

But if your opponents are weaker 4.0s, even as a 3.5, when playing with a strong 4.0, you may be expected to win. For example, say you are a strong 3.5 (3.45) and you play with a strong 4.0 (3.95). Your combined rating is 7.4 or average is 3.7 which is close to an "average" 4.0. If you play two opponents that are a bit below average (3.65), you would be expected to win (or technically, to win more games than the opponents).

But with the strong partner, you very well may win, and if you don't (or again, technically if you lose more games than the opponents), the computer takes it as an indication that you and your partner weren't as strong as thought and you'd be adjusted down.

If you were to play this same match but with a weaker 4.0 (3.65), your average would be 3.55 and you'd be expected to lose so a win (or even losing very very close) may improve your rating.

a strong 3.5 player beats two other strong 3.5 players in very close matches 6-4, 4-6, 11-9 TB and 6-4, 6-7, 11-9 TB

these matches count toward their DNTRPS (both losers to this guy get bumped to 4.0), but not the winner of these matches. Ok

But both players who lost to the 3.5, lost two singles matches and are bumped to 4.0

The 3.5 not bumped goes 7-1, with only one loss at doubles 3&4 and stays at 3.5

any thoughts? The 3.5 had a 4.0E last fall, but no bump at the end of 2011.

My explanation: the 3.5 lost in doubles to a strong 3.5 / average 3.5 (who had played lost 5 matches with a very weak 3.5)

The one loss to the strong 3.5 / avg 3.5 was like App St beating Michigan and the USTA expected result was easy win. The loss pummeled the 3.5 who went 5-0 in singles and only loss this match.

Click to expand...

Entirely possible. Without more info and the specific players involved in all matches, I can't really say, but yes, a loss to a weaker team could be the match rating that pulls the overall rating down. But even the other wins may not have been matches that were rated high enough if the opponents were weak and/or the partner was strong.

The USTA NTRP ratings haven't made sense in years...probably never will. They like to keep us all guessing.

Click to expand...

I disagree. They make sense, there are just a boat load of dependencies (partner's rating, opponents rating, at the time of the match, score of the match) that make trying to understand them difficult, particularly when one focuses on the win-loss record. Mind you, it is natural to focus on win-loss record as we are programmed to do that from other sports and without a lot of work, there isn't a way to know the ratings of all the opponents to figure it all out.

Any accurate rating system (not that the NTRP is perfect of course) is going to be pretty complex, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense.

The other component of getting a ratings bump that has not been mentioned is the weighting of the playoffs for your year end rating. My understanding is that the USTA somehow uses a weighted average of your playoff performance and your dynamic rating to get your year end rating. No playoffs ... and they just use your dynamic rating at year end.

What this means is that players who are bumped usually fall into two distinct categories.

1) Good players that play up .... discussed at length here

and

2) Good players on good playoff teams.... Because they play in the playoffs these players likely get better opponents and doing well against these good players has a more dramatic effect on their ratings. Essentially because these matches against good players occurred in the playoffs they count double which can help you more.

I think I fall into the second category ... I was good relative to my 4.0 peers within my district but I do not think I would have been bumped had I not performed well in sectionals the last two years.

The other component of getting a ratings bump that has not been mentioned is the weighting of the playoffs for your year end rating. My understanding is that the USTA somehow uses a weighted average of your playoff performance and your dynamic rating to get your year end rating. No playoffs ... and they just use your dynamic rating at year end.

What this means is that players who are bumped usually fall into two distinct categories.

1) Good players that play up .... discussed at length here

and

2) Good players on good playoff teams.... Because they play in the playoffs these players likely get better opponents and doing well against these good players has a more dramatic effect on their ratings. Essentially because these matches against good players occurred in the playoffs they count double which can help you more.

I think I fall into the second category ... I was good relative to my 4.0 peers within my district but I do not think I would have been bumped had I not performed well in sectionals the last two years.

Click to expand...

Based on my own experience I believe this to be the case, but in my situation I think I *didn't* get the bump because of my poor performance at state. I had a pretty good year in league and beat three players who got bumped up and lost in singles to players who were both bumped up (I lost one time to a player who was DQed so I technically won that one). I also had some dominant wins over poor to moderate players at my level (1/1, 0/2, 0/2) late in the season.

However, I think the reason I didn't get the bump is that I had a pretty poor state tournament going 0-2 in singles and 1-2 in doubles with every match decided one way or the other by a tiebreak. One of my singles opponents at state also got the bump but overall I think my record there was a large part of why I am still at my current level next year.

On the other hand, as the saying goes, if you torture the data long enough it will confess to anything. Where's my cattle prod?

Based on my own experience I believe this to be the case, but in my situation I think I *didn't* get the bump because of my poor performance at state. I had a pretty good year in league and beat three players who got bumped up and lost in singles to players who were both bumped up (I lost one time to a player who was DQed so I technically won that one). I also had some dominant wins over poor to moderate players at my level (1/1, 0/2, 0/2) late in the season.

However, I think the reason I didn't get the bump is that I had a pretty poor state tournament going 0-2 in singles and 1-2 in doubles with every match decided one way or the other by a tiebreak. One of my singles opponents at state also got the bump but overall I think my record there was a large part of why I am still at my current level next year.

On the other hand, as the saying goes, if you torture the data long enough it will confess to anything. Where's my cattle prod?

Click to expand...

You piqued my interest so I took a look at your matches.

I don't believe Combo is counted in the Southern section, so your regular season record (on the court) would have been 8-5. I believe the cut-off for matches is 10/31 so the 3 late-season wins you mentioned aren't counted (after 11/1). While the DQ loss on the court counts as a win in the team standings, I believe the 6-1,6-1 score is used as-is for rating purposes.

So, an 8-5 record is good, but by itself is not indicative a bump is appropriate. Couple that with you playing a few self rated players and it is possible that some of what you thought were your better matches didn't actually generate match ratings. But ultimately, it really depends on the specific scores and opponents.

To get bumped, the majority of your results would need to be very good to great. If you play several opponents playing up, like I think you did, it is very hard to generate good match results for those matches. And even if you lose to good players that get bumped at the end of the year, you need the matches to be close to help you and you lost 3 and 1, 1 and 1, and 0 and 3 in 3 of the losses. These aren't close enough to help and probably still hurt your rating unless the opponents are way into the next level above you.

So, you may not have been as close to being bumped as you thought. Nevertheless, if you did poorly in playoffs, that certainly doesn't help either. But you say the matches were tight and these were likely against stronger competition so they might not have hurt as much as you think.

I don' believe Combo is counted in the Southern section, so your regular season record (on the court) would have been 8-5. I believe the cut-off for matches is 10/31 so the 3 late-season wins you mentioned aren't counted (after 11/1). While the DQ loss on the court counts as a win in the team standings, I believe the 6-1,6-1 score is used as-is for rating purposes.

So, an 8-5 record is good, but by itself is not indicative a bump is appropriate. Couple that with you playing a few self rated players and it is possible that some of what you thought were your better matches didn't actually generate match ratings. But ultimately, it really depends on the specific scores and opponents.

To get bumped, the majority of your results would need to be very good to great. If you play several opponents playing up, like I think you did, it is very hard to generate good match results for those matches. And even if you lose to good players that get bumped at the end of the year, you need the matches to be close to help you and you lost 3 and 1, 1 and 1, and 0 and 3 and 3 of the losses. These aren't close enough to help and probably still hurt your rating unless the opponents are way into the next level above you.

So, you may not have been as close to being bumped as you thought. Nevertheless, if you did poorly in playoffs, that certainly doesn't help either. But you say the matches were tight and these were likely against stronger competition so they might not have hurt as much as you think.

Entirely possible. Without more info and the specific players involved in all matches, I can't really say, but yes, a loss to a weaker team could be the match rating that pulls the overall rating down. But even the other wins may not have been matches that were rated high enough if the opponents were weak and/or the partner was strong.

I don' believe Combo is counted in the Southern section, so your regular season record (on the court) would have been 8-5. I believe the cut-off for matches is 10/31 so the 3 late-season wins you mentioned aren't counted (after 11/1). While the DQ loss on the court counts as a win in the team standings, I believe the 6-1,6-1 score is used as-is for rating purposes.

So, an 8-5 record is good, but by itself is not indicative a bump is appropriate. Couple that with you playing a few self rated players and it is possible that some of what you thought were your better matches didn't actually generate match ratings. But ultimately, it really depends on the specific scores and opponents.

To get bumped, the majority of your results would need to be very good to great. If you play several opponents playing up, like I think you did, it is very hard to generate good match results for those matches. And even if you lose to good players that get bumped at the end of the year, you need the matches to be close to help you and you lost 3 and 1, 1 and 1, and 0 and 3 and 3 of the losses. These aren't close enough to help and probably still hurt your rating unless the opponents are way into the next level above you.

So, you may not have been as close to being bumped as you thought. Nevertheless, if you did poorly in playoffs, that certainly doesn't help either. But you say the matches were tight and these were likely against stronger competition so they might not have hurt as much as you think.

Click to expand...

Schmke, I don't have a horse in this race, but still want to give you props for your many helpful posts like this one. Thank you for your contributions.
-Mike

The other component of getting a ratings bump that has not been mentioned is the weighting of the playoffs for your year end rating. My understanding is that the USTA somehow uses a weighted average of your playoff performance and your dynamic rating to get your year end rating. No playoffs ... and they just use your dynamic rating at year end.

What this means is that players who are bumped usually fall into two distinct categories.

1) Good players that play up .... discussed at length here

and

2) Good players on good playoff teams.... Because they play in the playoffs these players likely get better opponents and doing well against these good players has a more dramatic effect on their ratings. Essentially because these matches against good players occurred in the playoffs they count double which can help you more.

I think I fall into the second category ... I was good relative to my 4.0 peers within my district but I do not think I would have been bumped had I not performed well in sectionals the last two years.

Click to expand...

Nothing against you personally, man, but wouldn't you agree that, overall, a player like you just described yourself---one who went to and did well at sectionals---would almost certainly be moving into the very top echelon of your respective level? I would think that those players who perform very strongly at the sectional level are probably playing at a level above 95% or more of all players at their level nationally. At least for that time period. If that is true, it seems sort of reasonable to me that they would be bumped up---or al least not at all unreasonable that they were.

Nothing against you personally, man, but wouldn't you agree that, overall, a player like you just described yourself---one who went to and did well at sectionals---would almost certainly be moving into the very top echelon of your respective level? I would think that those players who perform very strongly at the sectional level are probably playing at a level above 95% or more of all players at their level nationally. At least for that time period. If that is true, it seems sort of reasonable to me that they would be bumped up---or al least not at all unreasonable that they were.

Click to expand...

I am not sure why I should take this personally ... I agree.

I was surprised when I was not bumped last year, but I understand the time it takes to raise a rating. I was getting frustrated that the only competitive league matches I would get would not happen until the postseason.

I was surprised when I was not bumped last year, but I understand the time it takes to raise a rating. I was getting frustrated that the only competitive league matches I would get would not happen until the postseason.

Click to expand...

Yeah. You should have been bumped last year. If so, we would have made districts, LOL.